Core i7-9700K vs FX-8120

CPU

GPU

Core i7-9700K

8 Cores8 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.9 GHz2018

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-8120

8 Cores8 Thrd125 WWMax: 4 GHz2011

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-9700K

8 / 8

14,397

+118.3%

6,594

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +96.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Delivers 16.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 32.2 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $205 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌
87.8% HIGHER MSRP
$385 MSRPvs$205 MSRP

FX-8120

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $180 less on MSRP ($205 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,594 vs 14,397).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.2 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($205 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.

Core i7-9700K

2018

FX-8120

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +96.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Delivers 16.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 32.2 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $205 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Costs $180 less on MSRP ($205 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌
87.8% HIGHER MSRP
$385 MSRPvs$205 MSRP

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,594 vs 14,397).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.2 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($205 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-9700K better than FX-8120?

Yes. Core i7-9700K is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 96.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 118.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-9700K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 96.8% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-9700K is the better fit. You are getting 118.3% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i7-9700K is the smarter buy today. Core i7-9700K is 87.8% more expensive on MSRP at $385 MSRP versus $205 MSRP, and it gives you a 96.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 16.3% better value on MSRP (37.4 vs 32.2 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i7-9700K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2011), 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 threads instead of 8/8. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i7-9700K Benchmark Check

FX-8120 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
1080p
low	308 FPS	165 FPS
medium	278 FPS	142 FPS
high	231 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	138 FPS
medium	221 FPS	117 FPS
high	178 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	75 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	63 FPS
medium	140 FPS	57 FPS
high	108 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	35 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open FX-8120

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
1080p
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	321 FPS	165 FPS
high	291 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	165 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	165 FPS
medium	282 FPS	165 FPS
high	258 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	152 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	165 FPS
medium	221 FPS	161 FPS
high	208 FPS	147 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	118 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open FX-8120

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
1080p
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	165 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	165 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	165 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open FX-8120

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
1080p
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	165 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	165 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	165 FPS
medium	360 FPS	165 FPS
high	360 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	165 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open FX-8120

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and FX-8120

Core i7-9700K

The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

FX-8120

The FX-8120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,594 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-9700K and FX-8120 share an identical 8-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4 GHz on the FX-8120 — a 20.2% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-8120 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the FX-8120's 6,594 — a 74.3% lead for the Core i7-9700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 8192 kB on the FX-8120.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 8
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+23%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+16%	3.1 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)+50%	8192 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	8192 kB+3100%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	14,397+118%	6,594

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-8120 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
Socket	LGA1151	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (FX-8120). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the FX-8120 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	FX-8120
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the FX-8120 debuted at $205. On MSRP ($385 vs $205), the FX-8120 is $180 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 32.2 pts/$ for the FX-8120 — making the Core i7-9700K the 15% better value option.